Using artificial intelligence (AI) at work might damage an employee's professional reputation, a new study by Duke University has claimed. While generative AI tools such as ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini may boost productivity, their usage invites social stigma that could be difficult to shrug off.
"This work provides experimental evidence that people incur a social evaluation penalty for using AI tools at work. This generates a dilemma for employees: The productivity gains they can achieve with AI tools carry a social cost," the study showed.
Over 4,400 participants were enrolled for the study titled "Evidence of a social evaluation penalty for using AI," published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS). The findings reveal a consistent pattern of bias against those who receive help from AI.
"Individuals who use AI tools face negative judgments about their competence and motivation from others. These judgments manifest as both anticipated and actual social penalties, creating a paradox where productivity-enhancing AI tools can simultaneously improve performance and damage one's professional reputation." the study highlighted.
The researchers tested a broad range of stimuli on the participants to analyse whether their age, gender, or occupation affected the perception of fellow workers regarding their AI use.
"We found that none of these target demographic attributes influences the effect of receiving Al help on perceptions of laziness, diligence, competence, independence, or self-assuredness," the study authors said.
Also Read | Sam Altman Extends Olive Branch To Elon Musk After Old Posts Surface: "Let's Be Friends"
Consequently, the study suggests that the social stigmatisation of AI use is not limited to its use among particular demographic groups. Participants who do not use AI regularly (less than weekly) consider candidates who do use AI as lazy, which translates to lower perceptions of task fit.
However, this social penalty can be offset for tasks for which AI is clearly deemed useful. When AI is described as being useful for the task, candidates who use AI are perceived as having higher task fit.
"When AI is not useful for the task, candidates who use AI experience a Task Fit penalty relative to those who use non-AI tools," the study added.
